IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ftpext] RFC Errata for consideration

Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com> Sat, 31 July 2010 08:02 UTC

Return-Path: <anthonybryan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ftpext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ftpext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 610D93A6824 for <ftpext@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:02:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.455
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.455 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.144, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M867d225wzPI for <ftpext@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:02:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DE1B3A6782 for <ftpext@ietf.org>; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:02:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iwn38 with SMTP id 38so2271628iwn.31 for <ftpext@ietf.org>; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=wdu9fRMNYWTEpk709MQx3Vag9LuxR2cpmSyJm6Y3BbY=; b=FCAlEsEC1pC44R4W+uFoaE2Yjt3NVf+imFhYrx/U1Dkov2kpzMwT0p9zyDRHFH+5sH 76SMyuJdAMkNoTQynQ8V5eDOGITLzaZejUH429QYZqMGlgI7U+C017b4p+fg9wpNRguq QkA9Y81+Iae3A8lILdN6TVfpbx7Gw7NgtMvTk=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ugM7X1ogxgV3JFa7PhVIot17SGBB0DkSLijY7qFTWkpmuFz14HdKh1gPgd/Dun8CTs 2INZRcpTL5Pjqf6lvVaNuLoKV10cKak02BI35OT0EY4b4AgTh2auJ+k7WziWSgVcUrS5 mVijeLZX+XtEoaBc0h9ZxapOErI5xYVFnjQhY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.172.70 with SMTP id k6mr3108314ibz.125.1280563394134; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.159.143 with HTTP; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1007301540330.15461@iskra.ottix.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1007301540330.15461@iskra.ottix.net>
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 04:03:14 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=M7QPMJ4d24nEyQPxeTC7BphYAO7yO6-OY2j80@mail.gmail.com>
From: Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com>
To: "William F. Maton" <wmaton@ottix.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: ftpext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ftpext] RFC Errata for consideration
X-BeenThere: ftpext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ftpext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ftpext>, <mailto:ftpext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ftpext>
List-Post: <mailto:ftpext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ftpext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ftpext>, <mailto:ftpext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 08:02:50 -0000

On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 3:43 PM, William F. Maton <wmaton@ottix.net> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>        If this WG gains traction, would RFC errata (such as the ones I came
> across for RFC 3659) also be dealt with as part of a charter?

when you say dealt with, do you mean verifying reported errata?

I think that would be the plan, if this WG were chartered.

I believe I saw a few unverified errata when looking at FTP RFCs.

-- 
(( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ]
  )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email